News   Nov 22, 2024
National Housing Day: City of Toronto and Riverdale Co-op Open Affordable Homes
 560     1 
News   Nov 22, 2024
Bauhaus Condos Rising in Toronto's Old Town
 1K     5 
News   Nov 22, 2024
49-Storey Waterfront Tower Proposed at Spadina and Queens Quay
 2.7K     8 

Danforth Line 2 Scarborough Subway Extension

kEiThZ said:
I like how they always start with "Since 2003, the Liberal government has..."

Over nearly a decade and a half, their support is rather pathetic if you look at it on an annual basis.
Click to expand...

You could certainly question their operating budget contributions, but there's $1 billion for the Spadina extension, $8.4 billion (as far as I know) contribution for the Eglinton LRT...then there's Finch, the Scarborough Subway...

What does that work out to? A billion a year in transit investment? We're still behind, but that's far greater than previous governments.
 
syn said:
You could certainly question their operating budget contributions, but there's $1 billion for the Spadina extension, $8.4 billion (as far as I know) contribution for the Eglinton LRT...then there's Finch, the Scarborough Subway...

What does that work out to? A billion a year in transit investment? We're still behind, but that's far greater than previous governments.
Click to expand...

Of those, only one will be delivered before the election. One hasn't even done significant planning. One will barely have any serious construction underway. And one will be in progress.

So of the $8 billion they've pledged how much will be delivering a tangible improvement at election time, or even before the next election?
 
44 North said:
Seems odd that you're so passive about the lack of a Lawrence station. Safe to say that even the most ardent supporters of SLRT all agree it's pretty bonkers for SSE to bypass such a key corridor. It doesn't make sense. People should be rallying the troops and demanding it, or at least questioning why the line needs to be so deep that it's a supposed cost-prohibitive impossibility.
Click to expand...
Why? The priority now is about getting shovels down in the ground. It wouldn't be too late to push for Lawrence station after the tunnel is done and they're in the phase of building stations.

And it would be up to people who would actually use the Lawrence station to rally for it, because to most Scarborough residents it would be better to have this 6km express route instead...
 
Pardon me if I'm asking a dumb question, but I haven't found an authoritative source.....

Did Council's decision mean that the deep tunnel is the sole design option at this point? Is cut and cover off the table, either because it has been shown to be unworkable or because Council or staff simply decided not to pursue it?

- Paul
 
44 North said:
Seems odd that you're so passive about the lack of a Lawrence station. Safe to say that even the most ardent supporters of SLRT all agree it's pretty bonkers for SSE to bypass such a key corridor. It doesn't make sense. People should be rallying the troops and demanding it, or at least questioning why the line needs to be so deep that it's a supposed cost-prohibitive impossibility.
Click to expand...

I'm personally affected by this removal of Lawrence stop. But since the debate has been long watered down to a transfer before SCC vs. a Smarttrack/SSE combo, I can only pick what I feel is the best of the two plans for Scarborough future between the two. At no point ever did I ever agree this was the right plan, but "IF" and its a big if that Smarttrack fares can be implemented as TTC fares I can see the Lawrence and Finch Smarttracks stops end up being very solid additions to Scarborough commuters. It adds a layers of redundancy for TTC commuters when the subway has its usual delays and closures. That alone is a bonus.

"Rallying the troops" over the details only works in City's that are somewhat united. In this City it will just stall building completely. One can only hope the stop is voted back in, but fighting over the small details only fuels the oppositions appetite for transfer LRT and will inevitable create further delays from building anything.
 
Last edited:
OneCity said:
I am personally affected by this removal of Lawrence stop. But since the debate has been long watered down to a transfer before SCC vs. a Smarttrack/SSE combo, I can only pick what I feel is the best of the two plans for Scarborough future between the two. At no point ever did I ever agree this was the right plan, but "IF" and its a big if that Smartrack fares can be implemented as TTC fares I can see the Lawrence and Finch Smartracks stops end up being very solid additions to Scarborough commuters. Its adds a layers of redundancy for TTC commuters when the subway has its usual delays and closures. That alone is a bonus.

"Rallying the troops" over the details only works in City's that are united. In this City it will just stall building completely. One can only hope the stop is voted back in, but fighting over the small details only fuels the oppositions appetite for transfer LRT and will inevitable create further delays from building anything.
Click to expand...
Yea I agree, trying to force the addition of Lawrence station could jeopardize this whole project. The opposition would use this as an opportunity to push the LRT instead...

It's unfortunate that it has come to this, but the opposition leave us with almost zero flexibility in terms of customization.
 
Sakraycore said:
It wouldn't be too late to push for Lawrence station after the tunnel is done and they're in the phase of building stations.
Click to expand...

Considering the topography and planned depth, I think it's possible that it might be too late in such a scenario. Hence why an inline Lawrence should be considered/supported today.

crs1026 said:
Pardon me if I'm asking a dumb question, but I haven't found an authoritative source.....

Did Council's decision mean that the deep tunnel is the sole design option at this point? Is cut and cover off the table, either because it has been shown to be unworkable or because Council or staff simply decided not to pursue it?
Click to expand...

I always assumed cut/cover was off the table from the start. But I'd be interested to know if a low level bridge has been or is still considered; maybe get a station like Old Mill.
 
44 North said:
Considering the topography and planned depth, I think it's possible that it might be too late in such a scenario. Hence why an inline Lawrence should be considered/supported today.



I always assumed cut/cover was off the table from the start. But I'd be interested to know if a low level bridge has been or is still considered; maybe get a station like Old Mill.
Click to expand...
I guess...but council voted against even considering the Lawrence station just last month so I think that's a bad sign for Lawrence station atm.
 
Leo_Chan said:
They don't exist. I'm just making it up. That why I said "I'm guessing".
Click to expand...
Oh, I thought you meant about the reason for those costs. I didn't think you were guessing on the costs.

I don't think it would go that high, in year of spending dollars, if they are anything like the currently projected schedule.
 
kEiThZ said:
Yes and no. It'd be offsetting stations on Smart Track/RER.
Click to expand...

And that "escalation of commitment" can go both ways and seems just as appropriate for the transfer Opposition. Instead of critiquing and moving forward a non transfer alternative they just keep doubling down an old plan which had its support clearly broken long ago. Just like a bad investment and the denial to change course while achieving the same result
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top